People v. Lopez

Decision Date06 November 1961
Docket NumberCr. 7529
Citation196 Cal.App.2d 651,16 Cal.Rptr. 728
PartiesPEOPLE of the State of Callfornia, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Glorya LOPEZ, Defendant and Appellant.
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Lionel Richman, Los Angeles, for appellant, by appointment of District Court of Appeal.

Stanley Mosk, Atty. Gen., William E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Mario A. Roberti, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.

WOOD, Presiding Justice.

In a nonjury trial the defendant was convicted of unlawful possession of marijuana. She appeals from the judgment.

Appellant contends that the arrest, search and seizure were unlawful; that there was no probable cause for the arrest or search; and that the search was not an incident of a lawful arrest.

Officer Cline, a police officer of Los Angeles, testified that about March 1, 1960, he and Officer Conroy (a police officer) received information from Officer Thompson, who is an agent of the Treasury Department of the United States (Secret Service Division) that Glorya Lopez, also known as Glorya Campensano, was wanted by the 'Treasury Department of the United States Secret Service' on a charge of stealing and forging checks; they (Officers Cline and Conroy) had two or three conversations with Agent Thompson by telephone, and they talked with him personally in their office; Agent Thompson did not tell them there was a warrant for the arrest of said person, and they did not ask him whether there was a warrant; the last time he (Officer Cline) and Agent Thompson discussed the Glorya Lopez matter, prior to the arrest (on August 4, 1960), was three or four weeks prior to the arrest; he (witness) had information from Agent Thompson that Glorya Lopez was wanted for forged or stolen checks; as far as his office is concerned he 'had her made on some checks' and 'he wanted her picked up'; they (officers) acted on the information and made the arrest; that if he (witness) as a policeman receives information that a person is wanted, and if he comes across that person and has knowledge that he is wanted for a crime, he places him under arrest.

He testified further that on August 4, 1960, about 12:30 a. m., when he and Officer Conroy entered a bar on Brooklyn Avenue in Los Angeles he saw the defendant, Glorya Lopez, who was seated on a stool, and he asked her if her name was Glorya Lopez; she replied, 'Yes'; he asked if she was also known as Glorya Campensano; she replied, 'yes'; he said: 'You are under arrest for forgery of government checks. There is a warrant for you from the United States Secret Service'; the officers transported the defendant to the police station for further investigation; and caused her to be searched; he (witness) found, in her purse, two marijuana cigarettes, three seconal pills, and seven benzedrine tablets, which were in a piece of Kleenex or toilet paper; he asked her where she got those things; she said that a fellow by the name of Shorty came in around midnight and gave them to her; the search was made for the purpose of determining whether she was carrying contraband and whether she was in possession of any checks or equipment that might be connected with the charge of forging or stealing checks.

It was established that the cigarettes contained marijuana. The cigarettes, pills, and tablets were received in evidence subject to a motion to strike that evidence. After the defendant testified, she made a motion to suppress the evidence on the ground that the officers did not have sufficient information to justify the arrest. The motion was denied.

Defendant testified that on June 24, 1960, she had been released from federal prison at Terminal Island where she had been incarcerated for violation of probation on a charge of using heroin; she was in prison under the name of Glorya Campensano; when she was arrested she was an employee (a waitress) at the cafe or bar where the arrest occurred, but she had finished her work for that day about 12:15 a. m. and was sitting at the bar when she was arrested; a person by the name of Shorty, whom she had known about five years, gave her a package and told her to hold it for him until he finished work; she did not know what was in the package; she did not remember telling the officers what time it was when Shorty gave the package to her.

Appellant asserts that the arresting officer did not act upon firsthand...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • People v. Brooks
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • May 26, 1965
    ...111, 116, 232 Cal.App.2d 111, 42 Cal.Rptr. 504; People v. Beard (1962) 199 Cal.App.2d 67, 68, 18 Cal.Rptr. 350; People v. Lopez (1961) 196 Cal.App.2d 651, 655, 16 Cal.Rptr. 728; People v. Nebbitt (1960) 183 Cal.App.2d 452, 461, 7 Cal. Rptr. 8; People v. Gonzales (1960) 182 Cal.App.2d 276, 2......
  • People v. Estrada
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • May 3, 1965
    ...given Hardman by Agent Murphy.9 See also People v. Ross (1962) 206 Cal.App.2d 542, 546, 24 Cal.Rptr. 1; People v. Lopez (1961) 196 Cal.App.2d 651, 654, 16 Cal.Rptr. 728; People v. Carella (1961) 191 Cal.App.2d 115, 129-130, 12 Cal.Rptr. 446; Arata v. Superior Court (1957) 153 Cal.App.2d 767......
  • People v. Senkir
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • June 26, 1972
    ...250 Cal.App.2d 123, 130, 58 Cal.Rptr. 259; People v. Estrada, 234 Cal.App.2d 136, 150--151--152, 44 Cal.Rptr. 165; People v. Lopez, 196 Cal.App.2d 651, 654, 16 Cal.Rptr. 728; People v. Robertson, 240 Cal.App.2d 99, 49 Cal.Rptr. 345; Galena v. Municipal Court, 237 Cal.App.2d 581, 589, 47 Cal......
  • People v. Sanders
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • April 14, 1967
    ...of the United States Treasury Department, concerning a matter coming within the scope of his official duties. (People v. Lopez, 196 Cal.App.2d 651, 654, 16 Cal.Rptr. 728.) Having reached this fourth link in the chain downward, we face the duty of testing the admissibility of the evidence ob......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT